[ RadSafe ] three-pronged uranyl exposure therapy proposal

James Salsman james at bovik.org
Wed Oct 26 17:15:52 CDT 2005

Dear Professor Raabe:

Thank you for your ASTOUNDING comment.

I hope you will share your alternative hypotheses for the 
observed epidemiological data -- if you have or ever come across 
any -- and that you will join me in asking the Naval Health 
Research Center's Birth and Infant Health Registry to release 
their time series birth defect statistics from the February 
1991 exposed populations.  Do you have any reason to not want 
to look at that time series data?

What is your opinion on UO3(g) decomposition compared to UO3(s)?
The uranyl ion is a strong catalyst.  I don't see how UO3 could 
release two oxygens without a physically contacting neighbor. 
I do agree that hot UO3(g) will ionize in gas collisions, but 
I'm not sure whether that represents a substantial quantity 
because at 1800-1200 Kelvin most gas collisions at those binding 
energies don't seem to be ionizing.  Uranyl plasma and ozone 
decomposition would be even more dangerous upon inhalation than 
UO3(g), slightly, and not only because of the ozone.

Do you have any colleagues who could figure this out?  I've 
spoken with Professor Olander at Berkeley, who helped out quite 
a bit.  Like other people with experience in the nuclear fuel 
safety industry, Professor Olander suggested that breathing 
uranium air fire fumes should be avoided until the quantities 
involved are determined empirically.  Do you agree?

James Salsman

More information about the RadSafe mailing list